"Conversation should be pleasant without scurrility, witty without affectation, free without indecency, learned without conceitedness, novel without falsehood."

I wonder how many women dream of having children when they are younger. Of getting married and living happily ever after. When we are children, little girls generally play with dolls, and drink imaginary cups of tea in their imaginary houses, and little boys run off and get dirty, and find trouble. It's just what kids do. I would also say that many women reach a certain stage in their lives where they want to have a family and have children and look after them, and many are also willing to put their careers on hold to do so. Not a problem. It stops many women from reaching levels of success that men do in the workplace because of it. That is their choice though, and no one puts a gun to their head or forces them to do so. In the news recently here there have been two divorce cases going through the courts, two court cases of relatively wealthy men, who have had to pay huge payouts to their wives. Melissa Miller will recieve £5million of her husband Alan's £17.5million fortune, and Julia Mcfarlane will recieve £250,000 a year, for life from her husband Kenneth. Does that sound fair to you?

These women have stopped their careers, so that their husbands can go out, and concentrate on their careers and give it their all. These women have stayed at home and raised families, and raised children. So surely they are entitled to some kind of payout if things go wrong? They have loved and supported their husbands. They have managed without them when they have had to put in extra time at work, they have looked after children, dealt with problems around the house, and generally put their own lives on hold for the sake of their family and everything else. They have done something a great deal of women do. Something that a great deal of women want to do. Is there any other job more rewarding than watching your children grow? I personally think these kind of settlements are ridiculous and spiralling out of control. Maybe one day when I get married, and put on hold my high paying career for kids, I will feel differently, but for the moment, I think such payouts are just silly, and are probably putting alot of wealthy people off getting married. Not that it should, because marriage is forever, but that is an entirely different blog.

So just how much do women contribute to their husbands success? Should they be compensated for walking away from their own careers? First of all, I have no doubt that the love and support that a wife gives her husband is a contributing factor to the way he performs at work. I am sure a wife provides help and advice where she can, and tries to make things as easy as possible for him at home. Like a good little wife should. That's what wives do though, isn't it? That's what you sign up for. If you aren't going to do that, then why bother in the first place, and why want money for doing something that should just be natural anyway? Secondly, when two people meet, who have successful careers, and they decide to have a family, how do you think they decide who stays at home with the kids? Fair enough the female will have maternity leave, and will have a little time off, but surely they will decide based on who has the most successful career and who actually wants to do it. I am guessing one of them does, for them to want to have kids in the first place, that is just common sense to me.

Maybe these women could have had really successful careers. I don't even doubt that. I am sure they were well looked after anyway, and didn't really do without. Plus, they had their children. That in my opinion is a huge added bonus. They got something out of that marriage, that money can't buy. They got their kids. How can anyone ever begrudge that? So you didn't have a career. Well you could of kept your career and not had children, but obviously they didn't want to do that. Which is fair enough. That was their decision. No one elses. I am guessing they would of wanted children even if they weren't with these men, if they were in different situations, so what would they of done then? I do not dispute these women made contributing factors to their husbands wealth. I don't disagree that they put their own careers on hold to raise a family. I just don't agree with the ridiculous amounts of money that are getting thrown around. Alot of people, who don't have the ability to build successful careers manage on alot less, and do it happily. So lets not make marriage, and children, a career move for women that don't know any better.

 


Comments (Page 1)
2 Pages1 2 
on Aug 03, 2006
SO let me pose a particular scenario...

My wife and I have been together for nearly 10 years. In that time I have supported her while she attended school for at least 5 years. Now, we have some student loans to pay and so on but without my income we would be on the streets. I keep us in the lifestyle we are accustomed to.

Let's say one day she does finish school. Right now we have triplets on the way but let’s assume our marriage was dissolved with no children at stake. She has finished school and becomes a top notch person in her field. She is really raking in the dough. She then later decides to have an affair. We go through the divorce proceedings. I have stayed at the same job where my income and ability to move up the ladder are limited but the job is consistent and steady. Am I not entitled to a share of the money she is earning? She couldn't have gotten there without my help.

I think in most cases where there is clear separation of 'life's duties', including the raising of children, the partner is certainly entitled to a portion of the proceeds. However, in the example above, if I was the one who cheated... that just makes me a poor, dumb looser. I guess my answer is, it depends on who is to blame.
on Aug 03, 2006

it all depends.  Doesn't it always?

When I got divorced, the judge split the baby.  Basically (as it is dictated by law), I paid Child support. and then the rest of the money was split 50/50.  Alimony and mine.  I thought it was fair.  She did not (she called my lawyer to ask if I would be a witness in her suit against her lawyer for incompetance.  No).

You are right, in most families it is a 50/50 issue.  Not in all.  As I was not rich, or making a ton of money, the judge was very fair.  She just did not think so.

When I lost my job, due to being laid off, I continued to send her the payments, but did ask for a reduction.  She stalled so long, the judge finally got mad (and held her in contempt - strange, I had done that many years before), and gave a judgement that was very good to me.

So again, it all depends.  Some Wives do.  Others are just leeches.

on Aug 03, 2006

Right now we have triplets on the way

How is that going?

on Aug 03, 2006
How is that going?


Next ultrasound is in the AM. It's been nearly 3 weeks.
on Aug 03, 2006

Next ultrasound is in the AM. It's been nearly 3 weeks.

My Prehensile toes are crossed! (and yes I can cross them).

on Aug 03, 2006
Hey, a guy has to eat, right?
on Aug 03, 2006
When my first marriage broke down, we split everything 50/50, amicably and went our seperate ways. Others were whispering in my ex-wife's ear, saying she could take me for everything I had and other nasty things. Thankfully, she ignored them.

It seems to me a lot of these people who go for large settlements are bound to come unstuck as it appears they're only motivated by greed. I can't help but think of the children of these relationships. What sort of example is being set? Methinks not a very good one.
on Aug 04, 2006

I think in most cases where there is clear separation of 'life's duties', including the raising of children, the partner is certainly entitled to a portion of the proceeds. However, in the example above, if I was the one who cheated... that just makes me a poor, dumb looser. I guess my answer is, it depends on who is to blame.

It all does depend on who is to blame, and you have to look at every situation individually and judge it from that, of course.  I just think people are asking for to much, marriage isn't a business arrangement, or at least I wasn't aware it was.

When I lost my job, due to being laid off, I continued to send her the payments, but did ask for a reduction. She stalled so long, the judge finally got mad (and held her in contempt - strange, I had done that many years before), and gave a judgement that was very good to me.

Sounds like you was well out of that!  She sounds nice...

Hey, a guy has to eat, right?

Hehe yeah....but they are getting enough to feed a small country!

Others were whispering in my ex-wife's ear, saying she could take me for everything I had and other nasty things. Thankfully, she ignored them.

When a relationship it ends, it can make decent people behave extremely badly, just because they are hurt and upset, and they want to make the other person hurt.  I guess things like this just really test the character of the person you are with.

I can't help but think of the children of these relationships. What sort of example is being set? Methinks not a very good one.

I agree.  The kids have done nothing, but still have to live with it.

Thanks for all the comments x

on Aug 04, 2006
I think whoever gets the kids should get the lions share no matter "who" is to blame for the divorce.

If the man takes the kids, he should get the house to raise them in plus child support from his wife. No matter if he makes more money.

What gets under my skin is when a couple with kids gets divorced, "A" takes the kids to raise while "B" gets them "most weekends." B pays child support but bitches about it being too much. Saying things like, "It's forty percent of my income!"

So what? A is exposing 100 percent of his/her resources to raising the kids...why should your 40 be considered "too much?"

I think part of being married is supporting and helping your spouse. Any success by either party during that time should be considered mutual. But that's just me.
on Aug 05, 2006

I think whoever gets the kids should get the lions share no matter "who" is to blame for the divorce.

I agree, and I agree with all of your comment.  As I said in the article though, many people survive, and bring up children on alot less than both them wives have recieved.  Plus one will be recieving a certain amount of money for life.  Will the kids be seeing all of that?  I highly doubt it.

Thanks for the comment x

on Aug 05, 2006

Nobody is successful in a vaccuum, Sally. I believe in a great number of instances that the "woman behind the man" is as much a part of the man's success as he is himself. If the woman married before the husband had millions, she should share in the fortune; this was a life they built together, and it's as much hers as his. If a woman married a man who was already a multimillionaire, that's another story. She had nothing to do with making him who he was.

Ivana Trump, for instance, was a good part of building Trump's empire. She deserved every penny she got. Marla Maples, on the other hand, was just along for the ride, if you'll pardon the pun.

on Aug 06, 2006
I'm with Gid and you, Sally. I have seen how much the support of my mother has allowed my father to go and do the things that he's wanted to do professionally, because we've been taken care of. My mother was a successful nurse with a great job, but she gave it up for the sake of the family.

And she doesn't regret it a bit, according to her. (Well, maybe with that one child . . .)
on Aug 06, 2006

And she doesn't regret it a bit, according to her. (Well, maybe with that one child . . .)

If you are as funny in real life as your stories are on line, I think she treasures you most of all.  After all, A laugh a day keeps the doctor away!

on Aug 07, 2006

If the woman married before the husband had millions, she should share in the fortune; this was a life they built together, and it's as much hers as his. If a woman married a man who was already a multimillionaire, that's another story. She had nothing to do with making him who he was.

When I think about this I think about what they would achieve as a single unit.  The husband would most likely still make his millions, but would the wife be able to make such an amount of money?  Well that depends on the situation...but it is unlikely.  I think women should be given a share...I agree with that, but some women now just marry and see it as making money, that isn't what marriage is about at all.

I have seen how much the support of my mother has allowed my father to go and do the things that he's wanted to do professionally, because we've been taken care of. My mother was a successful nurse with a great job, but she gave it up for the sake of the family.

My Mum is the same, so I can see it from that perspective.  She has allowed him to go off and do his thing, but hopefully if it ever came to it, he would make sure she was alright finiancially anyway, without any courts to tell him that.

If you are as funny in real life as your stories are on line, I think she treasures you most of all. After all, A laugh a day keeps the doctor away!

I imagine his Mum is extremely proud of him.  I don't meet many boys his age who are so lovely and so well thought out, and who can make me smile on a daily basis

on Aug 07, 2006

I'll put my own two cents in:

To the main question: It depends.

To the divorce question: I believe that an equal split of assets accumulated during the marriage if fair regardless of which party actually "earned" them.

When my wife and I met, we had nothing.  I was driving a Chevette. We were both in college.  Once we got married, I was always the one who supported us financially.  I had founded my company prior to us meeting but it was all potential then.

My wife worked in the office before our first child was born and has been a stay at home mother since (helping with the company on pay roll and other things).

So how much has my wife contributed to our financial success? It's hard to say. Her support and that she believed in me and didn't pressure me to just get a regular job early on was important, but that could just as easly be described as saying she wasn't a hindrance. 

My wife is very supportive.  But I don't think she had very much to do with the lifestyle we have today.

However, even with that said, if she divorced me or whatever, god forbid, I would say she is entitled to half of what we've accumulated since we got married.  Could she have earned that on her own? No. But that's not really the point in my opinion.

Marriage is about building a life together. It's sad that it doesn't work out sometimes. But it doesn't change my opinion that one cannot reasonably measure individual contributions to ones life and that when you get married, you are building a life together that is hopefully greater than the sum of its parts.

2 Pages1 2